Igor Roshchin wrote:
Yes, this makes it clearer. Thank you!
So, when Tamron or Sigma lenses are called "macro", but have a reproduction
ratio of 1:2 (say Tamron 70-300) or 1:2.9 (Sigma 28/1.8,
Tamron 28-300/3.5-5.6), - this is a frivolous use of the term.
They should've been called "close focus capable".
Correct?
I just found a similar definition in the Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macro_photography
It suggests that recently the term "macro" became used if
the 4"x6" (~10cmx15cm) print has at least 1:1 size of the object.
That might be explaining the loose usage of the word "macro"
by some manufacturers.
Thank
A lot of older Macro (And I mean actual macro) lenses only went to 1:2.
I know the current Canon 50mm f2.5 Macro only goes to 1:2, And didn't
the older A 50 f4 macro only go that far as well?
Now 1:4 (Which is very common as a 'Macro' capability) should probably
be called close focusing, but I think that 1:2 is defensible as a real
macro capability.
-Adam
